How many people think Sheila was the shooter

[lookout]

I found it Lookout, posted above. Don't agree with Mike's explanation though - I think the large bloodstain at the top the ND came from her wound and small stains are from the carpet that June walked over.

Well that goes without saying------------

[Caroline]

Well that goes without saying------------

If it goes without saying, why did you ask where the stains came from? 

[lookout]

If it goes without saying, why did you ask where the stains came from? 

I meant not agreeing with Mike's post which would include the examination too probably,not to mention the fact that I found what I was talking about.

[scipio_usmc]

Found------------the proof of blood at the back of Sheila's nightdress. On thread headed ( naturally ) " Bloodstains on the back of Sheila's nightdress "-Oct 10th 2011. General Examination Record 14/8/85.

Just so you know 2011 is not a few weeks ago...

For the 3 drops it says blood "soaked through" that suggests blood was on her body underneath and some soaked through to the outside.  Some blood could have went under her gown down her back and then through.  It is unclear was the 1/5 is supposed to mean. The others have sizes this doesn't have an inches sign after it though.

The very bottom of the fringe having blood suggests she had been sitting in some blood before her body was moved. This is another red flag indicating her body was moved that the authorities ignored.  They stupidly completely ignored the issue till the appeal stage.  Lucky for them they got the conviction so it didn't hurt them.

Defense expert Lincoln confirmed the blood on the gown was Sheilas

[guest2181]

[guest2181]

Perhaps 1/5 is actually i/s and stands for 'inside' ? 

[Jane]

Perhaps 1/5 is actually i/s and stands for 'inside' ? 

That's what I read it as meaning, Hartley.

[lookout]

Just so you know 2011 is not a few weeks ago...

For the 3 drops it says blood "soaked through" that suggests blood was on her body underneath and some soaked through to the outside.  Some blood could have went under her gown down her back and then through.  It is unclear was the 1/5 is supposed to mean. The others have sizes this doesn't have an inches sign after it though.

The very bottom of the fringe having blood suggests she had been sitting in some blood before her body was moved. This is another red flag indicating her body was moved that the authorities ignored.  They stupidly completely ignored the issue till the appeal stage.  Lucky for them they got the conviction so it didn't hurt them.

Defense expert Lincoln confirmed the blood on the gown was Sheilas

The particular reference to the nightdress had been repeated a few weeks ago since 2011. But it seems that only I took notice, t'was only because it was said that Sheila was perfectly clean with no blood etc on her.

[scipio_usmc]

Perhaps 1/5 is actually i/s and stands for 'inside' ? 

That sounds better.

[scipio_usmc]

The particular reference to the nightdress had been repeated a few weeks ago since 2011. But it seems that only I took notice, t'was only because it was said that Sheila was perfectly clean with no blood etc on her.

You said the examination record was posted a few weeks ago.  I wasted a while doing targeted searches of posts the last 50 days.  I should have known better than to take your claims at face value...

[lookout]

I wasn't here on the forum in 2011,so how would I have seen it other than it having been posted since?

[scipio_usmc]

I wasn't here on the forum in 2011,so how would I have seen it other than it having been posted since?

I came here after you and I read tons of things posted before I registered.  The archive contains an index of sorts to such posts plus photos

[lookout]

I didn't know that " Freddie " had left for Iran before the trial. I understood he'd been either " snubbed " because of who he was or just not considered  as a suitable witness. However,the truth of the matter is that while in Iran,Freddie was contacted by police but then were notified that he would not return,unless of course it was to testify and because he'd said it would have been purely for the Defence,nobody wanted to know.
I've since learned that the guy was genuinely trying to help Sheila,as a friend and nothing else,contrary to how the media had described the friendship.   

[lookout]

 Even Dr Ferguson was guarded in his evidence at trial not mentioning the fact that Sheila harmed her children,etc----------------because of Patient Confidentiality. Never mind that some poor guy was going to suffer a " death sentence " because of Ferguson's silence ! Because Sheila hadn't been sectioned she was not legally required to have taken ANY of the medication which had been prescribed for her.

[lookout]

There are some truly awful episodes involved with this case which I WON'T be repeating and doubtless not many will have known about but upset me greatly.